The Secret History

by Donna Tartt

book data

10,947 ratings, 4.03 average rating, 1,500 reviews (more data...)

rating	frequency	%
5		37%
4		36%
3		18%
2		5%
1		1%

edit

published

April 13th 2004 (first published 1992) by Vintage

binding

Paperback, 576 pages

isbn

1400031702 (isbn13: 9781400031702)

description

Under the influence of their charismatic classics professor, a group of clever, eccentric misfits at an elite New England college discover a way of th...more

find at: Amazon | Half.com | Barnes & Noble | compare prices ($7.90)…

new topic
discuss this book

topics	posts	views	last activity
The Next Best Boo...: OFFICIAL SUMMER CHALLENGE 2009	3878	4526	1 hour, 47 min ago
Novel Ladies: Author Alphabet	642	51	4 hours, 28 min ago
The Next Best Boo...: Author Alphabet	2765	1549	6 hours, 0 min ago

friend reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

lists with this book

Best Books of the 20th Century

1457 books | 8330 voters

Best Books of the Decade: 1990's

131 books | 264 voters

More lists...

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 14,363)

sort: default (?) | date
filters: all | text-only

02/24/08

Martine rated it:

bookshelves: favourites, modern-fiction, north-american, psychological-drama, thriller

Read in January, 1993

The first paragraph of The Secret History roughly sums up the mood of the book. In it, the narrator, Richard Papen, says that he thinks his fatal flaw is 'a morbid longing for the picturesque at all costs'. If you can relate to these words, chances are you'll love The Secret History. If not, you'll probably wonder what the fuss is all about. As for me, I can totally relate to those words, so I love the book. I've read it over half a dozen times, and while I do think it has its problems, I never ...more The first paragraph of The Secret History roughly sums up the mood of the book. In it, the narrator, Richard Papen, says that he thinks his fatal flaw is 'a morbid longing for the picturesque at all costs'. If you can relate to these words, chances are you'll love The Secret History. If not, you'll probably wonder what the fuss is all about. As for me, I can totally relate to those words, so I love the book. I've read it over half a dozen times, and while I do think it has its problems, I never fail to find it utterly gripping.

The Secret History is both an intellectual novel of ideas and a well-paced murder mystery without the old whodunnit element. The reader learns right on the very first page that Richard and his friends have killed one among their midst. The rest of the book explains how they came to their gruesome deed and what happened to them afterwards. And against all odds, it makes for compelling reading, despite the fact that you know right from the start who the killers are. Such is the power of Tartt's writing that you find yourself turning page after page, waiting for answers, justifications and a sign of remorse. Once these have been dealt with, the book loses a bit of its power, but until that time, it's near perfect.

Donna Tartt's great gift as a writer is her magnificent talent for description. Her evocation of life at a small private university in New England with its oddball mix of ivory-tower intellectuals and ditzy cokeheads is rich in detail, both shocking and funny. If it's not entirely realistic, she makes it so. Likewise, her skill at characterisation is superb. While Richard is not entirely convincing as a male narrator (a fact I find more noticeable every time I reread the book), he and his friends make up a fascinating cast of characters: six aloof, self-absorbed, arrogant intellectuals who are obsessed with ancient Greece and don't particularly care for modern life. They're snobs and they have major issues, but somehow that only makes them more alluring. Together, they form the ultimate inner circle, the kind of tight-knit group that you feel should always stay together. Which makes it almost natural that they should be willing to murder anyone who might jeopardise that group dynamic, incomprehensible though this may seem to the average reader.

I can think of many reasons why The Secret History strikes the chord with me that it does. For one thing, I have a thing for timeless and ethereal stories, and this is one of those. Somehow the book has a dreamlike, almost hypnotic quality, despite it being very firmly based in the rather unromantic 1980s. For another, I have always been drawn to the unabashedly intellectual, and this book has that in spades. It makes geekdom alluring, and I just love Tartt for that. Ultimately, though, I guess what I really respond to is the friendship aspect. The Secret History is very much a book about friendship. It's a book about wanting to belong, about trying to be accepted by people you admire and about being willing to make sacrifices to keep the friendship intact. It's about the insecurity you feel when you think you might not be completely accepted by the group, after all, and about the paranoia you experience when it seems your friends may have betrayed you. About the feeling of invincibility that comes with knowing you have great friends and the melancholy that accompanies the disintegration of a friendship. The book basically reads like an elegy on a great friendship, and one doesn't necessarily have to share the characters' intellectual attitude towards life, morality or morbid longing for the picturesque to be able to relate to that. It is enough to have yearned for close friendship. And let's face it, who hasn't?

I do not think The Secret History is a perfect book. The ending, I think, is decidedly weak, although to be fair, I can't see how else Tartt could have finished the book. The ending definitely reflects the disintegration that is going on in the characters' lives, and in that sense can be said to be appropriate. Still, I wish Tartt could have come up with something on a par with the rest of the book. If she had, this would have been a six-star book. I don't know many of those.
(less)

Like this review? yes (23 people liked it)

7 comments

09/04/07

Jamie rated it:

Has a copy to sell/swap — Read in September, 2007

recommends it for: Katie McCrackin

Okay, this book. This book was a lot of fun, partially, I think, because it was written in this fashion which made determining whether this was past, present or future virtually impossible. It was very romantically written and I tend to go for that sort of thing: simple meals of tomato soup and skim milk, five college-aged students who drink tea as well as burbon, scotch and on occasion whiskey--but not with anything as muddled and middle-class as coke mixed in--no, they drink it on ice, in th...more Okay, this book. This book was a lot of fun, partially, I think, because it was written in this fashion which made determining whether this was past, present or future virtually impossible. It was very romantically written and I tend to go for that sort of thing: simple meals of tomato soup and skim milk, five college-aged students who drink tea as well as burbon, scotch and on occasion whiskey--but not with anything as muddled and middle-class as coke mixed in--no, they drink it on ice, in thick lead-glass tumblers while spending weekends in a shabby (as only the very wealthy can have) weekend "cottage" which is actually a massive Victorian on the New England coast with a grounds keeper.

The boys are called "eccentric" but eccentric doesn't quite cut it. They are like no boys I've ever met: dressing souly in dark suits and silken cravats, while the lone female is called Camilla, smokes, speaks with a gravely femme-fatale voice and wears over-sized cashmere sweaters and is compared, looks-wise, to Helen of Troy.

This being said, perhaps it's not the most believable of novels, pray tell, however, it is EXACTLY what I LOVE in novels. Granted, there's a murder and some ghastly stuff, but I would much prefer life if it were like this: if No Fear T-shirts had never been invented, if teenagers said "I suppose" and didn't own televisions. If I really had met a girl in college who kept dusty tea-cups and water glasses filled with dandilions on her bedside table.

It was a beautiful book with great character development. It got a little to "masterpiece theater" on me at the end and while one twist would have been enough, there was instead a teather of strings going every-which way...but man what a lovely way to get a little bored...It was so well written, so crisp and precise, so pretty and...novel-like. I haven't been so inspired by setting since Edith Wharton. Really.

This would have been, sans the creepy, the way I HOPED my liberal arts experience would be, instead of over-weight girls with fake tans and highlights, birth-control contrived boobs and Ann Taylor, Banana Republic wanna-be classy with dimpled upper arms. I never met a Camilla, Charles or Henry. What a shame...kind of. I really prefer books to people.(less)

Like this review? yes (17 people liked it)

2 comments

07/08/07

Brent rated it:

Read in November, 2006

Okay, so let me see if I understand what's going on in this book: These college kids accidentally murder someone while participating in some ancient ritual which involves some form of alternate consciousness. Then, they're shockingly ho-hum about the entire thing because after all it was just some random farmhand or something who just accidentally happened to be around. They never ever discuss this murder. They don't even really feel bad about it until someone threatens to expose them. Plus...more

Like this review? yes (16 people liked it)

2 comments

10/10/07

Abby rated it:

bookshelves: favorites

Has a copy to sell/swap — Read in October, 2007

recommends it for: anyone who went to a liberal arts college

The Secret History by Donna Tartt is like drinking the scotch the characters drink in the book: smooth, sweet, smoky and scalding. You keep drinking, having no idea how drunk your getting. Then you try to stand up and the world falls out from under your feet.

The Secret History captured me from the first page with the introduction of the narrator, Richard, and his memories of Hampden College in Vermont. He falls in with a group of "Intellectuals" studying the Classics u...more

Like this review? yes (13 people liked it)

2 comments

09/25/07

Joe Hill rated it:

Has a copy to sell/swap — Read in July, 2007

recommends it for: anyone

Someone just brought up Nietzsche’s Apollonian vs. Dionysian theory, which is described at the link below, if you are as unfamiliar as I was. http://www.geocities.com/danielmacryan/n...

Apparently Donna Tartt was well-versed in this theme, as it is prevalent in The Secret History. The gist of Nietzsche’s theory is that the ancient Greeks attained such a high level of culture mainly due to their personal struggle between the opposing philosophies of Apollo and Dionysus; Apollo be...more

Like this review? yes (11 people liked it)

add a comment

09/13/08

Rebecca rated it:

bookshelves: disturbing, horrible, intellectual, literary-fiction, mystery, pompous, tragic

Read in September, 2008

recommends it for: no one

This novel, like so many other first novels, is full of everything that the author wants to show off about herself. Like a freshman who annoys everyone with her overbearing sense of importance and unfathomable potential, Donna Tartt wrote this book as though the world couldn't wait to read about all of the bottled-up personal beliefs, literary references, and colorfully apt metaphors that she had been storing up since the age of 17.

The most fundamentally unlikable thing about this b...more This novel, like so many other first novels, is full of everything that the author wants to show off about herself. Like a freshman who annoys everyone with her overbearing sense of importance and unfathomable potential, Donna Tartt wrote this book as though the world couldn't wait to read about all of the bottled-up personal beliefs, literary references, and colorfully apt metaphors that she had been storing up since the age of 17.

The most fundamentally unlikable thing about this book is that all of the characters -- each and every one of them -- are snobby, greedy, amoral, pretentious, melodramatic, and selfish. The six main characters are all students at a small and apparently somewhat undemanding college in Vermont, studying ancient Greek with a professor who's so stereotypically gay as to be a homosexual version of a black-face pantomime. In between bouts of translating Greek, the students end up murdering two people, and then devolve into incoherent, drunken, boring decay.

The best thing I can equate this book to is the experience of listening to someone else's dream or listening to a very drunk friend ramble on and on and on, revealing a little too much awkward personal information in the process. The climax of The Secret History's narrative was around page 200, but the book was 500 pages long. So, essentially, this book contained 300 pages of scenes where the characters do nothing but drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes, go to the hospital for drinking so much alcohol and smoking so many cigarettes, get pulled over for drunk driving, talk about alcohol and cigarettes, do cocaine, and gossip about each other (while drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes).

Tartt's writing was sometimes genuinely good at establishing a thrilling and suspenseful mood, but other times, especially toward the end, her writing became the kind of self-conscious, contrived, empty prose that I can imagine someone writing just to fill out a page until a good idea comes to them, kind of like how joggers will jog in place while waiting for a traffic light. That kind of writing practice is fine...as long as the editor is smart enough to cut it before the final copy. The last 300 pages were the authorial equivalent of that kind of jogging while going nowhere, and it soured the whole book for me.

In the book's attempt to comment on the privilege, self-interest, and academic snobbery of rich college kids in New England, the book itself comes to be just as self-absorbed and obsessive as its characters -- it turns into a constant litany of unnecessary conversations, sexual tensions that go nowhere, purple prose descriptions of the landscape, contrived plot twists that fizzle out, and forced, overblown metaphors.

The confusing part was that Tartt seemed to identify with (and expect us to identify with) these students -- not to admire them for murdering people, obviously, but to respect and envy their precious contempt for everything modern and popular, as though they lived on a higher plane than normal people. The cliche of academic types being remote from the mundane world and out of touch with reality may have a grain of truth to it, but Tartt took that cliche way too far. The story is set in the early 90s, and yet some of the characters had never heard of ATMs, and they still wrote with fountain pens, drove stick shift cars, cultivated roses in their backyards, wore suits and ties to class, and said things like, "I say, old man!" Did I mention that this story is set in the early 90s? It got to the point where all the anachronisms came to seem ridiculous and gratuitous.

Ostensibly, the point of the novel was to critique the point of view that privileged academics are somehow superior to the average person, but Tartt seemed too enamored of her own characters and the endearing way they held cigarettes between their fingers to really allow that kind of critique to be successful. Maybe Tartt's second novel managed to get away from the claustrophobic selfishness of The Secret History, but I don't feel up to reading it after this.(less)

Like this review? yes (12 people liked it)

2 comments

04/19/09

Manny rated it:

Read in January, 1993

I remember that I liked it when I read it. But I don't recall that much of the book, and in general my system is that the less I remember, the more I mark it down. Of course, that could say more about me than about the book.

I do recall being just a little skeptical about how good the author's knowledge of classics was. It's not like I know anything about the subject - I did a couple of years of Latin at school, which I hated, and I only just passed my exams. But there were a couple o...more I remember that I liked it when I read it. But I don't recall that much of the book, and in general my system is that the less I remember, the more I mark it down. Of course, that could say more about me than about the book.

I do recall being just a little skeptical about how good the author's knowledge of classics was. It's not like I know anything about the subject - I did a couple of years of Latin at school, which I hated, and I only just passed my exams. But there were a couple of funny moments. Like, I remember a bit where the word "Argentine" came up, and the narrator says that the "Argent" piece sounds golden to her.

Um... "argent" derives from Latin argentum, which (I just looked it up) derives from the Greek 'Αργυρος, translated as silver or white metal. Even I knew the Latin derivation. So the atmosphere didn't feel quite authentic.

________________________________________________

I have been feeling a little guilty about nickpicking this book, which, I readily agree, is sometimes quite beautiful and moving. But here's my attempt at a justification. If you're going to write about some form of obsession, it really helps to have experienced that obsession yourself. Most people have been in love at some time, so descriptions of being in love often ring true. At the other end of the spectrum, very few authors are serial killers, and your average fictional serial killer tends to come across as rather silly.

In the middle, you have unusual forms of obsession, which can make good books. But the ones I like most are definitely written by people who've known them first-hand. Nabokov was crazy about chess, and Luzhin's Defense is, at least in my opinion, the only good novel ever written about chess obsession. David Foster Wallace was extremely serious about junior tennis, which is one of the things that make the E.T.A. part of Infinite Jest so compelling. And I find it hard to believe that someone who wasn't himself a literary theorist could have written Small World.

If you're obsessed with something, you immerse yourself in it to such a degree that even tiny details become terribly important. That's why it felt so odd when Donna Tartt got a few things wrong in this book, which is supposed to be about people who are obsessed with classical culture. It shattered the illusion for me, and I was annoyed with her for doing that. But if you aren't as obsessive as I am, there's maybe no reason why it should worry you.

(less)

Like this review? yes (6 people liked it)

26 comments

08/22/07

Elizabeth rated it:

Read in October, 2006

I’ve read this book probably half a dozen times since I first picked it up in grad school. It’s so thoroughly addictive, for a number of reasons. First, Tartt accomplishes the difficult feat of writing an intellectual novel that is obsessively detail-oriented and yet is an incredibly well-paced mystery. You learn about a murder on the first page, and then the whole novel unravels for you how it happened, with liberal doses of ancient Greek literary and philosophical references thrown in. Sec...more

Like this review? yes (8 people liked it)

add a comment

08/13/07

Michael rated it:

Read in April, 2008

(aka Dead Poets Society ... of DOOM!)

The characters all see the collision coming, as if in slow motion. The time and place are set; they could have turned away, but chose not to, and the story is the path to that explosive collision and the trajectory all the broken parts follow as they burst and separate.

I'm not much for mysteries. Someone dies, someone did it, and so much time is spent finding out who and why. Tartt gives you the who immediately, and although it's never...more

Like this review? yes (8 people liked it)

6 comments

03/05/08

Kim rated it:

bookshelves: contemporary, eh, gr-friend-recommendations

recommended to Kim by: Michelle, Val

This came highly recommended... and I hate that. It usually means that I'm either going to love it or it will be, eh... okay.

Yep, it was okay. This is my problem with hype. I read and I read and I keep thinking, it will wow me soon, it will, it has to. Then, it's done and here I am.

The story is pretty good, the pace, pretty slow. I felt like I'd seen a Lifetime film based on this at some point, but I did a bunch of googling and there's nothing out there, so scrap ...more

Like this review? yes (6 people liked it)

24 comments

07/13/08

Madeline rated it:

bookshelves: all-time-favorites, the-list

The best word I can think of to describe this book is mesmerizing. You know from the very first page that the narrator and his friends will kill someone during the course of the story - you even know who the victim is and how he dies. But that didn't stop me from reading this book as fast as I could, trying to absorb every word.
A truly gifted author can create the most unappealing character possible and still draw the audience to his/her side. Donna Tartt does exactly this with her main c...more The best word I can think of to describe this book is mesmerizing. You know from the very first page that the narrator and his friends will kill someone during the course of the story - you even know who the victim is and how he dies. But that didn't stop me from reading this book as fast as I could, trying to absorb every word.
A truly gifted author can create the most unappealing character possible and still draw the audience to his/her side. Donna Tartt does exactly this with her main character, Richard, who is far from a good person. He lies frequently and well, and over the course of his narration will often mention being completely drunk or doing lines of cocaine in a matter-of-fact tone, with absolutely no shame. His five friends, all Greek scholars at an elite private college, are just like him. The six main characters of this story are not good people, and that does not bother them. That's probably what makes them, and their story, so incredibly fascinating.

Here's one of my favorite quotes from the book, and it sort of sums up the entire point of the story:
"The Greeks were different. They had a passion for order and symmetry, much like the Romans, but they knew how foolish it was to deny the unseen world, the old gods. Emotion, darkness, barbarism...Do you remember what we were speaking of earlier, how bloody, terrible things are sometimes the most beautiful? It's a very Greek idea, and a very profound one. Beauty is terror. Whatever we call beautiful, we quiver before it. And what could be more terrifying and beautiful, to souls like the Greeks or our own, than to lose control completely? To throw off the chains of being for an instant, to shatter the accident of our moral selves? Euripides speaks of the Maenads: head thrown back, throat to the stars, 'more like deer than human being.' To be absolutely free! One is quite capable, of course, of working out these destructive passions in more vulgar and less efficient ways. But how glorious to release them in a single burst! To sing, to scream, to dance barefoot in the woods in the dead of night, with no more awareness of mortality than an animal! These are poweful mysteries. The bellowing of bulls. Springs of honey bubbling from the ground. If we are strong enough in our souls that we can rip away the veil and look that naked, terrible beauty right in the face; let God consume us, devour us, unstring our bones. Then spit us out reborn." (less)

Like this review? yes (5 people liked it)

8 comments

12/01/07

Lindsey rated it:

bookshelves: 08-only-not

Read in February, 2008

recommends it for: punkass intellectuals, people who feel obligated in life

I don't know about this book...
At first I was drawn into it and I didn't know why. Since I pretty much don't really care for people who are "intellectuals" or jerks (especially ones who feel the need to do something or act a certain way to feel good about what they're doing in life) the main character really wasn't appealing. I think it was the mystery of the death that sucked me in. I had all kinds of ideas about why it happened (most of them revolving around Julian) and when i...more

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

1 comment

06/24/07

S. added it (review of isbn 0679410325)

recommends it for: Heather

Studying the Classics: The Potboiler

Okay, so if you like Bret Easton Ellis or Thomas Harris, you're going to love this 500+ page novel about a group of Greek studies students. Yep, they're studying Greek and the classics. Wait, where are you going, Gentle Reader? You don't find reading Aristotle in the original as exciting as a comic book film?

Author: Donna Tartt is a Southern writer--if by that definition you only mean a writer who is from the South. Born in Greenwood, M...more Studying the Classics: The Potboiler

Okay, so if you like Bret Easton Ellis or Thomas Harris, you're going to love this 500+ page novel about a group of Greek studies students. Yep, they're studying Greek and the classics. Wait, where are you going, Gentle Reader? You don't find reading Aristotle in the original as exciting as a comic book film?

Author: Donna Tartt is a Southern writer--if by that definition you only mean a writer who is from the South. Born in Greenwood, Mississippi, she was educated at the University of Mississippi and, the rather un-Southern, Bennington College, where she and Bret Easton Ellis (American Psycho) became friends. The Secret History (dedicated to Ellis) is Tartt's first novel, which earned her a prodigious $450,000 advance. Currently, Tartt publishes as a contributing writer to the magazine the Oxford American; my favorite piece of which is her essay entitled "Spirituality in the Modern Novel" (issue Nov/Dec 1999).

Plot: It's simple: a group of Greek students kill their friend. Now if you think I've spoiled the plot all you have to do is read the Prologue to discover this for yourself. Tartt gives away the usual carrots in a mystery (who gets it and who did it).

Richard Papen, the narrator of the novel, (Tartt takes on the male voice to tell this thriller--though I think it has more to do with the dynamics of the inner Greek circle than a comment on the male murderous mentality) is a kid from Plano, CA--never trust them West Coast folks--who ends up studying Plato at an exclusive New England private college (much like Bennington). He soon joins an inner circle of Greek students under the tutelage of their demi-god Julian, a mysterious professor who demands such complete dedication to his course of study that the students have to only take classes under him. The group of students consists of Henry, the most intelligent, wealthy, and darkly charismatic of the group and ultimately a sort of Pan to Julian's Dionysus; Francis, a Victorian-ish homosexual; the twins Charles and Camilla--the only girl and the group's love interest, except for Francis; and Bunny, the jovial and annoying victim.

Tartt cleverly reveals in the Prologue that Richard, already a part of the group, participates in the murder of Bunny. Then as the novel begins, we follow Richard as he meets these strange people and becomes accepted by them. We are pulled into the novel wondering why Bunny, a friend of theirs, has to be killed.

The Pretense: With references to Homer, Dante (sure he's Italian but he's still an oldie), Plato, Aristotle, Euripides, Jacobean revenge plays (British but who reads those guys anymore anyway), and so on, it's candy for geek, I mean Greek, wannabes, like me. All said allusions, however, are in a clear context and often explained so that no prior knowledge is needed (as the above passage shows). In fact, Tartt often painfully over explains these allusions and her references to classical texts/ideas, so be warned. Many readers maybe put off by the cultural elite tone of the book and not be able to empathize with the characters, seeing them as snobs or pretentious poseurs which will ruin the experience of the book. But then, The Secret History's preoccupation with incest, dionysian orgies, and murder reminds us why Ancient Greece was so much fun. (less)

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

add a comment

06/10/07

Punk rated it:

bookshelves: good-more-than-once, queer

Read in December, 2003

Fiction. A group of students learn Ancient Greek at a small Vermont college, but something's strange about their exclusive study sessions and reclusive professor. Our narrator starts out on the fringes of their group, but as he grows closer to them he also gets hopelessly entangled in their troubles.

I love this book. It's slow and mysterious, and it uses one of my favorite conceits: a close-knit group of misfit students clearly up to something, or about to be up to something. And I d...more

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

add a comment

12/10/08

Laurel rated it:

(review of isbn 0060518049)

bookshelves: fiction

I have mixed feelings on this one.

The book centers around a very small/elite group of students studying Greek at a rural New England college. From the very first page, we know that one of these students was killed, and by whom. What we don't know is why.

The secrets to this murder are slowly revealed to us through the point of view of another student, Richard, as he is accepted into the group and sucked into their strange world.

I was definitely gripped by t...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

2 comments

07/16/08

Brian Calandra rated it:

Read in July, 2008

At the transition from the first to second half of the story, marked by a FIFTY-PAGE reveal in a single monologue by a character who's defining trait is his inscrutable lack of emotion, the reader discovers that things aren't what they seem. Unfortunately, the second half's hook is that things are exactly what they seem: these kids believe every action oozes the portent of Oedipus at the Oracle when, in fact, the world is humming along without paying them the least mind. While that may be the ...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

12/19/07

Reid rated it:

Read in November, 2007

Having graduated from college just over a year ago, I find this portrait of college life infinitely satisfying. It doesn't hurt that I went to a small, private liberal arts college and took many of my credits in Classics. Nonetheless, I believe any reader can dig into and love this book. I began it on a Thursday and finished it on Tuesday morning at 2 AM. I read the book for 2 hours on a saturday night, for god's sake. Perhaps the best part of the book is that from the opening five pages, you kn...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

10/13/07

Recynd rated it:

bookshelves: edgy-fiction, fiction, literary-fiction, loved-it

Read in April, 2008

I'm only about halfway through, but my heavens...it's fantastic!

And in response to Lindsey's review of same, I'm neither a "punkass intellectual" nor someone "who feels obligated in live".

Update: I LOVED this book. Loved it.

There are enough synopses written by far more adept synopsizers than I; instead, I'll offer my pros and cons.

********************
PROS

This is one of those (unfortunately) rare novels that ...more I'm only about halfway through, but my heavens...it's fantastic!

And in response to Lindsey's review of same, I'm neither a "punkass intellectual" nor someone "who feels obligated in live".

Update: I LOVED this book. Loved it.

There are enough synopses written by far more adept synopsizers than I; instead, I'll offer my pros and cons.

********************
PROS

This is one of those (unfortunately) rare novels that has it all: a storyline that is quick to grab, then moves the reader along at the perfect pace; sentences that are so well-crafted that I couldn't help but read a few out loud, and many over again, just because I loved the way they felt; characters who, though I couldn't relate to a-one (and, if truth be told, were somewhat interchangeable; see CONS), were so interesting and well-enough developed as to be unforgettable. Oh, and don't let me forget my favorite aspect of this book: the perversion. Ahhhhh, the perversion.

CONS

For such unforgettable characters, I couldn't manage to (a) remember anybody's name; nor (b) really tell them apart. It was sort of odd...I mean, there were five or six major players, and one of them was a chick. It's not like I was trying to juggle a cast of thousands or anything. Let's see, there was the Narrator, the Twin, the Top Dog, the Dead Guy, the Gay Guy...and...the Chick. Was there one more? Okay, there was Dancer, and Prancer, and Donner, and Blitzen, Comet, and Cupid, and Donner, and Blit...wait, I said those already...

Even though, the characters weren't really the important part, at least individually. They were all so freakish, and freakishly similar. And freakishly perverted/. I DO so wish that the author'd have seen fit to expand a litle more; there were enough hints, though, to spark my naughty imagination, but certainly not nearly enough to quench it.

**********************

In the interview with the author at the end of the book, there is mention of an earlier review in which the story was described as "Southern gothic". Tartt, sounding not only disingenuous, but also like one with a stick firmly implanted in her backside, responded: "I'm puzzled by how a novel set wholly in New England, with virtually no Southern references or allusions, could be categorized as Southern gothic." Well, I'LL tell you how it could: IT FEELS SOUTHERN GOTHIC.

Or, more accurately, it feels the way a book that's Southern gothic should feel...bleak, creepy, ethereal, pessimistic, other-than. Foggy. Melancholic. Old-timey, dated.

For the very reasons some critic used "Southern gothic" to describe this novel, I adored it. Two thumbs up.

As an aside, I admit it's not nice to notice someone's ass-stick; it's downright RUDE, even, to point it out. But sometimes I gotta point out the pink elephant in the middle of the room. In any event, if umbrage is taken, I ask that you take a peek...just a quick skim'll do...at the Reader's Guide in the Ballantine paperback edition. Just see if I'm not hitting the nail smack dab in the middle of its head...(less)

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

add a comment

10/02/07

Kendra rated it:

Read in October, 2007

Despite its pretentiousness, I really enjoyed this book. While reading it, my biggest criticism was that you won't actually find college students -- no matter how rich or strange -- who talk or dress or act like these students (at tiny, fictional Hampden College in Vermont) do. Wearing suits on a daily basis? Wearing pince-nez, for god's sake?? After seeing the author's picture and reading her interview at the back of the book, I have to revise that criticism a bit and concede that, just per...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

10/14/07

Joe Chappell rated it:

bookshelves: postmodern-world

Read in January, 2005

recommends it for: those who simply enjoy a good story

this is one of those novels that those who think they are more intelligent than they are or cooler than they are would easily scoff at, but they are missing the point of the simplicity of a superbly crafted story. if after having read this, you are expecting to have had your mind expanded or to have gleaned something very philosophical about mankind or global warming, or the postmodern late capitalist society we live in, you are missing the point! this is pleasure reading & storytelling in the o...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 718 719 next »

recent status updates | recommend it | blog it

combine
other editions (32)

More editions...

quotes from this book

"Could it be because it reminds u that we are alive, of our mortality, of our individual souls- which, after all, we are too afraid to surrender but yet make us feel more miserable than any other thing? But isn't it also pain that often makes us most aware of self? It is a terrible thing to learn as a child that one is a being separate from the world, that no one and no thing hurts along with one's burned tongues and skinned knees, that one's aches and pains are all one’s own. Even more terrible, as we grow old, to learn that no person, no matter how beloved, can ever truly understand us. Our own selves make us most unhappy, and that's why we're so anxious to lose them, don't you think?" More quotes...